NCAA's move to link coaches with APR makes sense
January 19, 2009 6:01 PM
Posted by ESPN.com's Tim Griffin
When the NCAA created the Academic Progress Report, it was meant to differentiate between schools to determine how well their students performed in the classroom.
With the framework already in place, the NCAA's Board of Directors has voted to make a similar determination for individual head coaches. Several members of the NCAA's board have said they hope that the numbers serve as a kind of "lifetime batting average" to determine how a coach's team produces in their studies.
The NCAA has released team APRs since 2005, subjecting low-scoring teams to the loss of scholarships and potentially stiffer sanctions including postseason bans if they fail to improve.
Coaches' APR scores would follow them from job to job under the proposed plan, although no penalties for underachieving performers would be attached to their APR scores.
Basketball coaches have complained bitterly about linking scores to individual coaches, feeling they are being singled out. Football coaches have not been as widely vocal about such a proposal.
But in my mind, anything that promotes accountability and transparency in academic performance is clearly a good thing.
And why just stop at coaches? How about also recording scores for athletic directors, school presidents and even conference commissioners?
Now, if we could just get football coaches to make their polls transparent each week, we'll be getting somewhere.
http://myespn.go.com/blogs/ncfnation/0-5...sense.html
We could then cross-check that stat with winning percentage and get an even MORE interesting piece of statistical data....
(01-19-2009 11:57 PM)converrl Wrote: [ -> ]We could then cross-check that stat with winning percentage and get an even MORE interesting piece of statistical data....
I believe that is what the author is trying to say. Then he goes on..
Quote:And why just stop at coaches? How about also recording scores for athletic directors, school presidents and even conference commissioners?
Makes sense to me.
My gut tells me it would be an inverse correlation...
(01-20-2009 12:03 AM)converrl Wrote: [ -> ]My gut tells me it would be an inverse correlation...
Of course it would be an inverse correlation. Winners win by getting the biggest and fastest, not the smartest. They play in the Ivy League.
But I think what is happening here is that the public is looking at the APR and saying the University's are taking stupid players. How about hanging that same sign around the neck of the one who recruits and coaches them? Then when he moves on to the next program, and it happens again, I believe there is a trend.
The trend would show that there are precious few kids out there who are both stellar in the classroom while also being 5-star athletes..those who are go to a select few institutions.
Since the rest of the coaches are hired to win a large percentage of the games they coach...they recruit kids with skills who are not outstanding in the classroom.
School administrators have to make up their minds--do they want a top-tier winning program? Or do they want a high grad rate and stellar GPA?
This is not so much the fault of the kids...those who want to go pro...and have skills...spend most of their time and energy on honing them in order to pursue their chosen profession--pro sports. The result being that the academic side often suffers. Since the pros have so few spots, and getting drafted is so tough...they spend their time improving what they believe will be their meal ticket. For most of these 5-star athletes, that meal ticket is their athletic prowess, not their academics.
When you have examples like Kevin Garnett and LeBron James staring you in the face, it's a lot tougher to argue that the smart thing to do in college is to spend the majority of your time on your education instead of your game. These kids would simply tell you to look at the amount of money kids who left college early to get drafted made vs. those who stayed in school...the fact that the percentage of kids with those kinds of skills are few and far between is meaningless to them--they think they have (or will have) the skill set to compete in that elite class of athletes.
If you were a coach, would it benefit you to tell these kids that they DON'T have that kind of skill set, and, no matter how much they try, they will never achieve it? What kind of motivational leader would that coach be perceived as if he did that?
The best thing a DI revenue sport could do for the majority of these kids is to offer them free schooling from their alma mater if their pro dreams go bust (as most of them will)--by that time, most of them will have enough perspective to come back to school and actually learn something that they can use to earn them a living. That way, a life isn't wasted chasing an unfulfillable dream.
Why not have the same score for professors? When I last checked, they are charged with educating students.
(01-20-2009 07:58 AM)QSECOFR Wrote: [ -> ]Why not have the same score for professors? When I last checked, they are charged with educating students.
Why not have the professor's score linked to the performance of ALL his students, not just student-athletes. The job of the professor is to effectively convey his knowledge to his/her students. The ideal goal of every professor should be to have a large percentage of the class understand and master a large percentage of the material. Failure of the class to master that material is just as much a failure of the professor as it is the student.
Ultimately, you would hope that you are such an effective teacher that EVERYONE in your class gets an "A"...and in so doing, you have proven your chops as a professor.
Unfortunately, for many instructors, they brag about how hard they are on their students, and how many kids they can flunk...this is 180 degrees backwards from the attitude they SHOULD have.
What a lot of teachers (not just at the college level, but all around the country at all levels of education) forget, is that technically, they have been HIRED by their class to teach them the material at hand...not the other way around.
I've always told kids that I have tutored....if you don't do well on the test, and you don't understand the material....you shouldn't pay me, because...I haven't done my job! Many of them look at me dumbfounded, but I think it's the only fair way to approach the situation.
converrl, I am with you 100%.
Someday.... In the far off future..... When I retire from what I presently do....
I would like to teach at UC. Helping the light go on for a young person is something that I truly enjoy.